What a fantastic result, one more to the little man (and woman :o) )

If you do send a further letter I would suggest including a line similar to the following, "given that your most recent communication demonstrates your complete lack of knowledge in this area, and before taking any further action on this matter which could result in sanctions being made against your company. I would strongly suggest that you seek legal advice of a solicitor"

it is the homeowner/tenant/occupier who determines who may and may not attend their premises (with certain exceptions, ie postman, meter reader etc,) otherwise the whole premise of tresspass would never be enforceable. Telling someone in writing that you do not want them on your property is good enough to stop them doing so, quoting Armstrong vs Sheppard gives them the basis for such a refusal, given that they have kindly acknowledged your letter they will have no excuse should you need to complain to the police

Just had a look at their Witness statement. Firstly, they make reference to a "represenation of the NOA" there is no such thing as a representation in law, it is either a true copy or it isn't and if it is then it should be pleaded as such, if it isn't pleaded as a true copy then you should dispute the document Secondly, the Redacted DOA, in the one sent to me there was a date which conflicted directly with the dates they claimed, (so have a look coz they could be using the same ream of sh!te") as they have redacted the DOA, anything that has been redacted is inadmissable at the trial and if they attempt to show the judge an unredacted copy of this document it must contain material facts pertinent to the case, therefore showing anything to the judge in private before the trail would open up Human rights issues as you would be being denied a fair trail. The interest that they have applied to the account, does it state anywhere on the agreement that there is allowed any application of interest at 12% after sale or assignment? if it doesn't then they are not allowed to apply it.

Have you checked your credit file, it's a quick and easy way of confirming if and when the account was defaulted. It was only when Morgan became involved with my case that I was able to ask for and receive information, before that you tend to get either automated responses or half baked attempts to confuse made by call centre drones. I clarified the nature of the assignment using a CPR18 request, that way it became part of their case when they went litigatious, if they think they have a good case, or even half a good case and if you are a homeowner then they will quickly try to move it through their system. if not, then you could expect something more like this It was Egg and Cabot themselves who provided the real evidence for the defence, and this I got from an SAR, so I coulodn't recommend getting a SAR at your earliest any higher, it is amazing how much stuff they retain.

That should have read "might run away" coz they could always walk fast

Although this doesn't fall under the CCA, you still have rights and one of those rights is to have a clear understanding what a debt is, who it is owed to and how the balance is made up. You should (as previously advised) write a simple prove it letter to this company, stating clearly I DO NOT ACKNOWLEDGE ANY DEBT TO YOUR COMPANY OR ANY COMPANY THAT YOU CLAIM TO REPRESENT You should request concrete proof of their ownership of the account and proof that they have a legal right to be a. contacting you and b. demanding monies off you as you recognise neither their company, nor the amount being claimed Since ( as previously stated) this debt is not covered by the CCA, then such proof would normally by way of a final phone bill outlining all charges applied and explaining how the balance was arrived at. You could also (if you do not dispute the actual bill) contact whoever you had your contract with and enter into an arrangement to pay only the actual balance back to them, many phone companies are very quick to set the dogs onto an account with little or no good reason

My god what a read!!! You gotta love those threatening letters, so much variance in the level of threat ON PAIN OF DEATH YOU MUST PAY US NOW!! OR WE WILL EITHER BRING DOWN THE WRATH OF KANE ON YOUR ABODE AND OF ALL THOSE THAT YOU HOLD DEAR WE WILL RENDER YOUR FLESH AND TEAR ASUNDER THE VERY SOULS OF YOUR ENTIRE LINE SCATTERING YOUR SEED UNTO THE FOUR WINDS OF THE WESTERN ISLES OR alternatively we might just plant a small purple geranium in your back yard and then run away

As Ida says, the CPR31.14 is a request for documents mentioned or referred to in the particulars of their claim, since they haven't actually issued a claim then we can't rely on that. CPR18 can be used to request further information. The link posted here goes into far greater depth over the purpose of each CPR and will help you gain a better understanding. The key here is not simply copy/pasting and using templates, but understanding the processes available and using them correctly against them

What they are saying is in part correct, once a judgement has been obtained it to all intent supercedes the agreement, one would be required to have the judgement set aside to effectively turn back the clock. Before following such a route you would need to be 100% certain of the facts, otherwise this could cost a lot of money. Before going down the litigation route, it would be wise to exhaust the more civil approach by simply writing a letter requesting copy/proof of the documentation underpinning their claim and subsequent High Court judgement, of course they will likely be reticent or even unabvle to provide this due to the amount of time elapsed and of course since they have already "won" once and had this matter settled in court. if they refuse to enter into discussions then you would need to look into the technicalities and the obvious costs associated with the raising of such a claim, I would suggest availing yourself of as much legal advice as you can obtain before going anywhere near this as I feel the time elapsed might be an overriding factor

Good morning SFU When dealing with cabot it is clear that the devil is in the detail. send the Original Creditor a SAR immediately, it could be the best £10 you ever spend, the OC would have recorded everything against your account making it very difficult for Cabot to now do that twisty Turny thing they like to do with the truth You need to make them prove firstly that the assignment is lawful, so ensure any communication clearly state that you do not acknowledge any debt with them and will continue to do so until they provide sight of the Notice of Assignment and Deed of assignment as laid out in the Law of Property Then there is the type of assignment, if as they say they do not carry the duties of the agreement, then the assignment must be an equitable assignment and they are clearly not the creditor If the assignment is absolute, then they are the creditor and are responsible for the fulfillment of any requests that would normally be made against the creditor. Cabot seem to get confused in this matter, I had letters (CCA18) from them stating that they had an absolute assignment, yet in a signed statement of fact they stated that they did not carry the resposibilities of the agreement. fulfilling a s78 goes nowhere near proving anything as the law now allows reproductions to be produced. You need to have Cabot provide you with clear evidence that they have ownership of your account, this would be via the assignment, without this they are nothing more than a fat lad at the door demanding unknown monies. You also need to have Cabot provide you with proof of your liability, this would be done via a true copy of the agreement, not a repro or otherwise, statements of account should also be provided by Cabot to prove that the amount they are claiming is correct. Has the account had a default placed against it?you need to see the default notice Is there PPI on the account? was it missold? have you seen a copy of the T&C for the PPI? if so, get it claimed immediately - my recent claim was discontinued in part because the PPI T&C specifically excluded my profession. Are there any unlawful charges against the account? get them reclaimed immediately (from the OC) you say it's an old barclaycard account - how old exactly? how long since you acknowledged it or made a payment against it? what sort of figure are they claiming? (just a ballpark figure will do - don't be specific) Do you still have communications from BC about the transfer/sale of this account? Have you made any s78 requests to BC?

It is recommended that all advise is given in open forum rather than via PM. This is so that the process is transparent and can be used assist all users equally and avoid the risk that incorrect or misleading advice may be given

Great stuff Kirsun, They discontinued mine when they were faced with a real defence. Cabot Morgan seem to operate on the premise that if they say something often enough then it must be true, they seem to be getting found out a lot more lately Isn't it nice to not have them in the back of your mind when you go about your daily life Congrats again Spam

You could (at this stage) use CPR18 to request further informationon their potential claim. ie not requesting copies of the documents, but whether they are actually in possession of the original agreement, the default notice, the notice and deed of assignment and in what format, electronic, paper, microfiche etc. As they are required to provide this along with a signed statement of fact it would be acceptable as evidence in a court and could be used to form part of any defence

You need to complain to Trading Standards as having two debt collectors pursuing the same debt is a definite no no

it is possible to fulfil a s77 CCA request by providing a copy of the terms and conditions or a reproduced agreement, however they would need the original in court. It sounds as if CSL don't know what they are talkign about or what has and hasn't been done on this account, what idiots, writing a letter like that which clearly demonstrates their ignorance If you sent the £1 fee and have as yet received anything then the CCA request is still outstanding

Complete bow larks The CCA 1974 is still relevant, the laws are not changing and the creditor still carries the burden of proof when bringing a claim in court. if the government adopt the scottish system, documents would need to be provided before they could even bring a claim Requesting such a document will suspend payments until the document is provided, if that means years, then it means years. There have probably been a lot more than 2 consumers who have lost in court without ever seeing an agreement, but that doesn't mean the laws have changed, only that the claimant lied and the judge believed them

I don't think there has ever been a doubt about the value of the S77 CCA request, although there is some genuine confusion over the expectations of the person making the request. Carey has muddied the waters a little and it certainly seems like a number of claimants are deliberately using Carey to mislead the judiciary and grant judgements where none should be granted. This should be stopped and the perpetrators brought to book for at the very least, lying in court. A clear and public message needs to be made to ensure that all of those responsible for the upkeep of the judicial system in this country should at least try to have a basic understanding of the relevant case law, judgements and their underlying statutes before even stepping into the court. so at least the people for whom the system was designed to serve can at least have a small chance of real justice

I agree with much that has been posted here, until this has been publicly aired and pinned down conclusively then I feel that the whole court experience will remain very firmly biased against the LIP. gradually the laws are changed and replaced so that what little protection the consumers possessed is gradually removed in favour of more Creditor friendly statutes. Judges who continue to misdirect themselves with regard to Carey and the like and in face of clear evidence to the contrary should have sanctions placed on them as it clearly demonstrates at the very least, either a complete disregard for the law, an ineptitude which beggars belief, or at the very worst a corruption which is so deeply rooted throughout the whole system that a judge can overrule the law of the land on nothing more than their say so. As for recommending capitulation......?!?!?

I agree fully that this is what should happen, without exception, the law is very clear However, we are seeing more and more cases where this simply isn't happening and judges are letting claimants get away with murder because the LIP either isn't fully aware of the relevant statutes or isn't confident enough to argue against someone who does this for a living

I think the day of the LIP is very much numbered with regard to defending a CCA or debt related case. The powers that be have regularly displayed their contempt for a system which supports the consumer and equally on a regular basis take every opportunity to chip away at the protections offered by CCA and associated laws and statutes and anyone who dares to challenge the legal structure which supports the debt collection, debt buying and debt enforcement fields had better make sure that they have good representation, because by many "club members" the LIP is seen to have no place in a law court. I think the "club members" have had it their own way for too long but as long as MPs and Lords hold positions on the boards of these parasitical organisations and certain judges are continuing to honour their paymasters by serving up useful precedents on demand then the chances of the LIP getting a fair shake of the stick become more and more unlikely

I was once under the misapprehension that Judges are legal people who are knowledgeable in matters legal. and are up to speed on the latest case law and judgements. I have since realised that in reality and in general they are little more than laymen who rely on what is entered into the claim and defence to form their opinion, then there is the counsel who apply their own knowledge and a certain amount of bunkum on the judge to convince them that their version of the law is correct, hence suddenly clause 4 becomes irrelevant and judgement goes to the claimant. Of course there are exceptions such as certain judges who seem to sit very firmly on the benches of their banking paymasters But the judges are still on the whole being hoodwinked into misdirecting themselves by counsel who are effectively telling lies in court and calling it "an interpretation of the law"

If the CCJ has been obtained without your daughter being made aware of the proceedings, then she can have it set aside, and then be allowed to defend the claim if it is repleaded. If there is no CCJ and it is an error on the part of the Credit Reference agency, then she can seek recompense from them. In the first instance find out the details of the CCJ, how much, who obtained it etc, then seek to have it set aside

Is this forming an aspect of your case or to form an aspect of your defence? ie multiple agreements?

On occasion